Zero Hedge reported that "Millions Of Hollywood Celebs Suddenly Cried Out In Terror: China Bans "Effeminate Men" From TV":
As if millions of
woke effeminate Hollywood voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
As part of Beijing's sudden "neo-cultural revolution", the Chinese government has issued new orders to its broadcasters in its continuing crackdown on culture, business and social mores. This time, it called for a ban on what it termed “effeminate men,” asking instead that “revolutionary culture” be touted. This, needless to say, is terrible news for an entire generation of woke, Hollywood snowflakes who know everything about virtue signaling - especially if it gets them lucrative Chinese production contracts - and who are absolutely clueless about anything within ten miles of a real of metaphorical revolution.
The edict, as Deadline reported, is part of President Xi Jinping’s call for a “national rejuvenation,” with business and the public under orders to align with his vision for China. In recent months, the regime has expressed official concerns and cracked down on youth online gaming, boy band culture, gambling, cryptocurrency and sports. The moves are part of discouraging what it sees as unhealthy attention to celebrities and certain distracting activities.The China TV regulators called for “resolutely put an end to sissy men and other abnormal esthetics." [https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/if-millions-hollywood-celebs-suddenly-cried-out-terror-china-bans-girlie-me]
Now, the thought came to me that Francis's closest collaborators seems to have an abnormal number of “effeminate men” or "sissy men" such as Fr. James Martin.
Does this mean Francis's inner circle of “effeminate men” might be banned from China?
On the serious side, here is an old post that talks about the problem of the "Effeminate Church of Francis":
A true physical or spiritual father when his children are abused or
being lead on a destructive path will defend his children from the
abusers or promoters of evil paths that will lead them to hell.
If he only cries because the children have been abused as Francis did with the Chilean sex abuse victims, but doesn't defend them from the priest sex abusers and the bishops who protect them then he is not acting like a man.
Francis showed he is effeminate by not having a manly and fatherly heart that is outraged by the evil of his spiritual children being sexually abused.
Francis is not behaving like Jesus Christ who declared:
"It were better for him, that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he cast into the sea, than that he should scandalize one of these little ones."
Former federal investigator Leon J. Podles, Ph.D., thinks that the bishops don't behave like Jesus or even like men.
Being amazed at how bishops in the Church are effeminate, Podles wrote:
"Gilbert Kilman, a child psychiatrist, commented, 'What amazes me is the lack of outrage the church feels when its good work is being harmed. So, if there is anything the church needs to know, it needs to know how to be outraged.'"
"Mark Serrano confronted Bishop Frank Rodimer, asking why he had let his priest-friend Peter Osinski sleep with boys at Rodimer’s beach house while Rodimer was in the next bedroom: 'Where is your moral indignation?'”
"Rodimer’s answer was, 'Then I don’t get it. What do you want?' What Serrano wanted Rodimer to do was to behave like a man with a heart, a heart that is outraged by evil. But Rodimer couldn’t; his inability to feel outrage was a quality that had helped make him a bishop. He would never get into fights, never rock the boat, never 'divide' but only 'unify.'” [http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=22-06-012-v]
Podles thinks the effeminate church began before Francis with Pope John Paul II who showed sorrow like Francis, but never behaved like a man with a heart that was outraged at the evil. He failed to remove sex abusing high ranking clerics like Fr. Marcial Maciel:
"He [John Paul] publicly apologized for the errors of remote predecessors, but would not apologize for his own errors and the errors of the bishops he had appointed, errors in governing the Church that allowed the abuse to go on." [https://www.google.com/amp/s/billcork.wordpress.com/2007/12/13/review-of-leon-podles-sacrilege-sexual-abuse-in-the-catholic-church/amp/#ampshare=https://billcork.wordpress.com/2007/12/13/review-of-leon-podles-sacrilege-sexual-abuse-in-the-catholic-church/]
Pope Benedict XVI was the last pope to act like a man. He confronted the sex abusers and the bishops who protected them.
He had a heart of a man and true spiritual father when he showed outrage and called them "filth." He removed the sex abuser Fr. Maciel and set up a system to remove predator priests and the bishops who protect them.
Podles shows this is how a true Catholic man and follower of Jesus Christ acts:
"Aquinas, too, says that 'lack of the passion of anger is also a vice' because a man who truly and forcefully rejects evil will be angry at it. The lack of anger makes the movement of the will against evil 'lacking or weak.' He quotes John Chrysostom: 'He who is not angry, whereas he has cause to be, sins. For unreasonable patience is the hotbed of many vices, it fosters negligence, and incites not only the wicked but the good to do wrong.'” [http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=22-06-012-v]
Unfortunately, journalist Hilary White, on January 25, reported that Francis "has all but completely dismantled" the "effective" reforms instituted against clerical sex abuse by Benedict:
"Pope Benedict installed effective procedural reforms on clerical sex abuse; Francis... has all but completely dismantled or reversed those changes... Benedict 'had defrocked or suspended more than 800 priests for past sexual abuse between 2009 and 2012'... His reforms specifically included bishops who refused to act against priest-abusers... 'This Pope has removed two to three bishops per month'... These reforms - and - removals - have ceased entirely under Francis."
(Remnant, "Pope Francis Accused of Inaction in Notorious Sex Abuse Cases, January 25, 2017)
Francis has acted even more effeminate than the effeminate Cardinal Bernard Law who is the media face of bishops who protect predator priests. Here is a list:
-Francis accused the victims of calumny. Law did not.
-Francis said he had not received any evidence about the sex abuse case when a member of his inner circle of nine Cardinals and chief adviser on sex abuse personally deliver a letter of evidence to the Pope. Law never did anything close to this.
-A credible victim alleged that the bishop, Francis had defended, not only covered-up, but kissed the predator priest and watched the sex abuse which in effect is a form of sex abuse. Law never defended any priest who did such things.
-Imagine the outcry that Pope John Paul II would have had if he defended Cardinal Law if a credible victim had alleged that Law had not only covered-up, but kissed the predator priest and watched the sex abuse which in effect is a form of sex abuse.
-Imagine the outraged that Pope John Paul II would have had if his perfect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith who was Cardinal Ratzinger was Francis's CDF perfect Archbishop Luis Ladaria Ferrer who will go to trial on April 4 in France for "complicity in alleged cover-up" of paedophile priest Fr. Bernard Preynat. (Business Standard, "French cardinal, Vatican official to stand trial for paedophile cover-up," September 19, 2017)
-Over "1300 Catholics in Osorno [the diocese where Francis appointed Barros to be bishop], along with 30 diocesan priests, and 120 members of the Chilean Parliament sent a letter to Pope Francis urging him to rescind the appointment of Bishop Barros."((Remnant, "Vatican Watch... So Much for Pope's Child Protection Commission," July 12, 2016). Francis called the Barros protesters "dumb." Law never did anything close to this.
-Francis overturned the Pope Benedict XVI appointed CDF sex abuse ruling to bar Juan Barros from the office of bishop and then appointed him bishop of Osorno. Law never did anything close to this.
-Francis "has all but completely dismantled" the "effective" reforms instituted against clerical sex abuse by Benedict. Law never did anything close to this.
Next, we get to the effeminate church both liberal and conservative.
Imagine the consensus of journalists, leftists, conservative and even abuse survivors saying that the allegations against Judge Moore were "all just about sex" and he only has a "blind spot."
The media and leftists did this for Bill Clinton. The journalist, conservative, leftist and the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) are doing this for Francis.
National Catholic Reporter journalist and gay activist Thomas Reese as posted on the SNAP website said:
"The overwhelming consensus in the media is that Pope Francis has a blind spot when it comes to sexual abuse."
(snapnetworks.org, "Pope Francis' blind spot on sexual abuse," Religious News Service, January 25, 2017)
Imagine if Pope John Paul II or Pope Benedict had defended Cardinal Bernard Law, as Francis defended Barros, if a credible victim had alleged that Law had not only covered-up, but kissed the predator priest and watched the sex abuse which is in effect a form of sex abuse.
There is no need to imagine what SNAP and the media would do. They didn't mildly say Benedict had a "blind spot":
In 2010, SNAP held demonstrations in front of the Vatican and the media "called for Pope Benedict's resignation" after the New York Times made false sex abuse cover-up allegations against Pope Benedict.
(PRI.org, "Italian police anticipate Vatican unrest," March 26, 2019 & National Catholic Register, "'The Pope Must Resign'? Bishops Respond," March 29, 2010)
Catholic League Bill Donohue in an ad published in the New York Times in 2010 responded to the calls for the Pope to resign:
"The Times has teamed up with Jeffery Anderson, a radical lawyer who has made millions suing the Church (and greasing professional victims' groups like SNAP), so they can weaken its moral authority. Why? Because of issues like abortion, gay marriage and women's ordination."
The secular media, most of the liberal and conservative Catholic media (EWTN being a exception) and SNAP are now involved in a massive covering-up for Pope Francis.
Are the secular media, most of the Catholic media, conservatives, leftists and SNAP accomplices in Francis's sex abuse cover-up?
If they don't call for Francis's resignation like they did for Benedict's resignation then they are part of the effeminate church that doesn't care about others.
Their "care" about the victims of sex abuse is a facade and a lie. Their hearts are centered only on their own selfishness: agenda, money or position.
Remember what Podles said about the effeminate church:
They will "never get into fights, never rock the boat, never 'divide' but only 'unify.'”
Finally, we get to the effeminacy of Cardinal Raymond Burke who showed he doesn't have a manly and fatherly heart that is outraged by the evil of his spiritual children being lead to hell.
If a father knows that his children are being taught teachings that could lead to the eternal punishment of hell, but only mildly teaches the truth without resisting those who are leading his family to hell then he is effeminate.
Cardinal Burke showed he is a member of the effeminate church when he was asked if he was "head of this 'resistance movement'" against giving Holy Communion to the divorce and remarried (those in adulterous relationships) which Pope Francis is officially teaching. Burke said:
"We... teach the faith. We are not leading any kind of movement."
(Catholic World Report, "Cardinal Burke: It is a "source of anguish" to hear suggestions "that I would lead a schism," January 22, 2018)
Theologian Dr. John R. T. Lamont, Ph.D., informed Burke and all the members of the effeminate church "that Pope Francis in Amoris laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense" and what he and they need to do to be part of the masculine church:
"The AAS statement thus settles an important and much-debated question. It establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense; that is, propositions that contradict truths that are divinely revealed and that must be believed with the assent of faith. It has not only established this; it has made it a religious duty for Catholics to believe that this is the case. Pope Francis is the Pope, and as such he has the power to exercise the papal teaching authority within the limits set to that authority by divine law. In the AAS statement, he has required Catholics to give religious assent of mind and will to the assertion that Amoris laetitia contains propositions that are heretical..."
"...It would be wrong however to think that Pope Francis is the worst scourge afflicting the Church. The election of a bad man as Pope can never be entirely ruled out. In a healthy Church the problem of a heretical Pope can and will be dealt with by the Catholic bishops, just as the immune system of a healthy body will react to disease and eradicate it. The immune system of the Church at the present is not operating. The bishops of the Catholic Church have remained silent about the heresy in Amoris laetitia, and have thereby abandoned the faithful. The heretical statements of Amoris laetitia have not been presented to the faithful as something that they can take or leave. Pope Francis has stated in official magisterial documents that they are papal teachings that they must accept. He has been supported in this by a large number of bishops. Pope Francis has thereby put pressure on all the Catholic faithful to reject divinely revealed truth. The faithful are not protected against this pressure by the bishops of Kazakhstan, or elsewhere, issuing a statement upholding the truths that Francis is denying. When encountering a difference of opinion between a papal document and a letter from a handful of Kazakh bishops, the faithful will naturally take the papal statement to be of higher authority."
"In order to protect the faithful from the attack on their belief and salvation that is being made through Amoris laetitia, it is necessary to address the falsehoods in that document itself, and to condemn them by appealing to an authority that justifies the rejection of a non-infallible papal letter; the authority of divine revelation expressed in the Scriptures and repeated by the magisterium of the Church. This appeal does not have to be a canonical warning to Pope Francis that could serve as the first step in his deposition. Such a canonical warning would have to be addressed to the Pope himself, and warn him of the nature of his crime and the consequences of persisting in it. It would be sufficient to take the lesser step of simply addressing the faithful to condemn Amoris laetitia as heretical. Aside from Bishops Bernard Fellay and Henry Gracida, no Catholic bishops have done this." [https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2018/02/important-guest-essay-meaning-of-amoris.html?m=1]
Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Rene Henry Gracida who is not a member of the effeminate church said:
"Cardinal Burke is saying... the truth. What is more important... is for people in the pew to say:
No, that is not true!"
"It's more important for people in the pew to raise up and say in print, in letters, in phone calls, in email, in person, in interviews... for the laity to say no that is not true... than for a Burke to say this is the truth...."
"We don't need people to say this is the truth. What we need in the present moment is for the laity to say that is not true..."
"Just like in the fourth century when those people shouted down Arius. No, you're wrong. He is Divine... That is what we have to do today... We have to have people stand up to the homilist, priests and bishops... No, you're wrong."
"You cannot give Holy Communion to the abortionists, to the abortion promoters and providers, to the divorce and remarried. You cannot do it. St Paul said you do not feed the Eucharist to dogs..."
"Right now they [the laity] are suffering in silence. They need to object. The laity, the sensus fidelium is that common sense among the laity who have accepted the magisterial teaching of the Church which is the foundation of their faith."
"Having accepted that when they hear something that is contradictory to the magisterial teaching of the Church, the sensus fidelium is a impulse that causes them to speak out and say no:
That is not true. Don't say that. Stop! That is the sensus fidelium in action!"
"Not to sit and suffer in silence. That's crazy. That's weird. That's wrong. Speak up. Resist! Object!"
(Church Militant video, "Laity, Rise Up!," April 4, 2017)
Bishop Gracida leads by example when he says: Speak up! Resist! Object!
On December 2, 2017, Gracida on his official website declared Pope Francis is teaching heresy:
"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents."
My conscience is clear as I look to my Lord and my God, Jesus Christ.
I join Bishop Gracida in not a being a traitor or effeminate coward like the traitors and effeminate cowards of the fourth century Arian heresy crisis and those in our present crisis.
St. Athanasius was excommunicated by the pope for his resistance to the Arian heresy that denied Jesus was God. He never left the Church. He was not in schism.
We will not leave the Church.
We are not in schism in our resistance to the heresy and sacrilege of giving Jesus Christ who is God in the Holy Eucharist to those in adulterous relationships when they refuse to repent and stop committing adultery.
The highest rooftop I can shout from is the Catholic Monitor.
Is your conscience clear?
If your conscience is not clear then:
Speak up! Resist! Object!
Remember that there is at least one bishop in the Catholic Church who a man and a true father calling you to:
Speak up! Resist! Object!
Pray an Our Father now for Bishop Gracida, the laity and the sensus fidelium as well as for more to join the resistance.